Predicting pathological complete response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy: A nomogram combining clinical features and ultrasound semantics in patients with invasive breast cancer

Background Early identification of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) is instrumental in predicting patients prognosis. However, since a fixed criterion with high accuracy cannot be generalized to molecular subtypes, our study first aimed to redefine grades of clinical response to NAC in invasive breast cancer patients (IBC). And then developed a prognostic model based on clinical features and ultrasound semantics. Methods A total of 480 IBC patients were enrolled who underwent anthracycline and taxane-based NAC between 2018 and 2020. The decrease rate of the largest diameter was calculated by ultrasound after NAC and their cut-off points were determined among subtypes. Thereafter, a nomogram was constructed based on clinicopathological and ultrasound-related data, and validated using the calibration curve, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, decision curve analysis (DCA), and clinical impact curve (CIC). Results The optimal cut-off points for predicting pCR were 53.23%, 51.56%, 41.89%, and 53.52% in luminal B-like (HER2 negative), luminal B-like (HER2 positive), HER2 positive, and triple-negative, respectively. In addition, time interval, tumor size, molecular subtypes, largest diameter decrease rate, and change of blood perfusion were significantly associated with pCR (all p < 0.05). The prediction model based on the above variables has great predictive power and clinical value. Conclusion Taken together, our data demonstrated that calculated cut-off points of tumor reduction rates could be reliable in predicting pathological response to NAC and developed nomogram predicting prognosis would help tailor systematic regimens with high precision.

[1]  A. Jemal,et al.  Cancer statistics, 2023 , 2023, CA: a cancer journal for clinicians.

[2]  P. Mcgale,et al.  Adjuvant and neoadjuvant breast cancer treatments: A systematic review of their effects on mortality , 2022, Cancer treatment reviews.

[3]  A. Rosato,et al.  Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy and Immunotherapy in Luminal B-like Breast Cancer: Results of the Phase II GIADA Trial , 2021, Clinical Cancer Research.

[4]  D. Berry,et al.  Breast MRI during Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: Lack of Background Parenchymal Enhancement Suppression and Inferior Treatment Response. , 2021, Radiology.

[5]  N. Harbeck,et al.  The use of breast ultrasound for prediction of pathologic complete response in different subtypes of early breast cancer within the WSG-ADAPT subtrials , 2021, Breast.

[6]  W. Symmans,et al.  Randomized Phase III Postoperative Trial of Platinum-Based Chemotherapy Versus Capecitabine in Patients With Residual Triple-Negative Breast Cancer Following Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: ECOG-ACRIN EA1131 , 2021, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[7]  C. Geyer,et al.  Adjuvant T-DM1 versus Trastuzumab in Patients with Residual Invasive Disease after Neoadjuvant Therapy for HER2-Positive Breast Cancer: Subgroup Analyses from KATHERINE. , 2021, Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology.

[8]  W. Cheng,et al.  Evaluating the Accuracy of Breast Cancer and Molecular Subtype Diagnosis by Ultrasound Image Deep Learning Model , 2021, Frontiers in Oncology.

[9]  X. Cui,et al.  Ultrasound-based deep learning radiomics in the assessment of pathological complete response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in locally advanced breast cancer. , 2021, European journal of cancer.

[10]  M. Somerfield,et al.  Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy, Endocrine Therapy, and Targeted Therapy for Breast Cancer: ASCO Guideline , 2021, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[11]  Zi-yao Li,et al.  Application of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound in the Differential Diagnosis of Different Molecular Subtypes of Breast Cancer , 2020, Ultrasonic imaging.

[12]  P. Conte,et al.  162MO Neoadjuvant chemotherapy and immunotherapy in Luminal B BC: Results of the phase II GIADA trial , 2020, Annals of Oncology.

[13]  P. Fasching,et al.  Evaluation of Pathologic Complete Response as a Surrogate for Long-Term Survival Outcomes in Triple-Negative Breast Cancer. , 2020, Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network : JNCCN.

[14]  T. Nagayasu,et al.  Optimal Tumor Reduction Rate and Modalities for Predicting pCR in Women With Breast Cancer , 2020, AntiCancer Research.

[15]  E. A. Sabek,et al.  Technical Factors Affecting Ultrasound Breast Tumor Size as Correlated with Pathological Type , 2019, Medicina.

[16]  Colin A. Purdie,et al.  Are baseline ultrasound and mammographic features associated with rates of pathological completes response in patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer? , 2019, Cancer Imaging.

[17]  E. Diamandis,et al.  Androgen receptor: A promising therapeutic target in breast cancer , 2019, Critical reviews in clinical laboratory sciences.

[18]  A. Lluch,et al.  Neoadjuvant Management of Early Breast Cancer: A Clinical and Investigational Position Statement. , 2019, The oncologist.

[19]  Z. Varga,et al.  Ultrasound-based prediction of pathologic response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer patients. , 2018, Breast.

[20]  Jinsong Lu,et al.  Quantitative contrast-enhanced ultrasound evaluation of pathological complete response in patients with locally advanced breast cancer receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy. , 2018, European journal of radiology.

[21]  Vivek Verma,et al.  Response rates and pathologic complete response by breast cancer molecular subtype following neoadjuvant chemotherapy , 2018, Breast Cancer Research and Treatment.

[22]  D. Buckley,et al.  Estimating breast tumor blood flow during neoadjuvant chemotherapy using interleaved high temporal and high spatial resolution MRI , 2018, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[23]  V. McCormack,et al.  Drivers of advanced stage at breast cancer diagnosis in the multicountry African breast cancer – disparities in outcomes (ABC‐DO) study , 2017, International journal of cancer.

[24]  Sung-Bae Kim,et al.  Adjuvant Capecitabine for Breast Cancer after Preoperative Chemotherapy , 2017, The New England journal of medicine.

[25]  M. Somerfield,et al.  Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy for Patients With Early-Stage Breast Cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline Update. , 2017, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[26]  Yuntao Xie,et al.  Early prediction of pathological outcomes to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer patients using automated breast ultrasound , 2016, Chinese journal of cancer research = Chung-kuo yen cheng yen chiu.

[27]  H. Yamashiro,et al.  Pathological complete response rate in hormone receptor-negative breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant FEC, followed by weekly paclitaxel administration: A retrospective study and review of the literature. , 2016, Oncology letters.

[28]  M. de Boer,et al.  Ultrasound is at least as good as magnetic resonance imaging in predicting tumour size post-neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer. , 2016, European journal of cancer.

[29]  S. Temin,et al.  Systemic Therapy for Stage IV Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline Update. , 2016, Journal of oncology practice / American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[30]  L. Carey CCR 20th Anniversary Commentary: Simpson's Paradox and Neoadjuvant Trials , 2015, Clinical Cancer Research.

[31]  K. Hunt,et al.  Tumor Biology Correlates With Rates of Breast-Conserving Surgery and Pathologic Complete Response After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Breast Cancer: Findings From the ACOSOG Z1071 (Alliance) Prospective Multicenter Clinical Trial , 2014, Annals of surgery.

[32]  Sung-Bae Kim,et al.  Lapatinib with trastuzumab for HER2-positive early breast cancer (NeoALTTO): survival outcomes of a randomised, open-label, multicentre, phase 3 trial and their association with pathological complete response. , 2014, The Lancet. Oncology.

[33]  Gideon Blumenthal,et al.  Pathological complete response and long-term clinical benefit in breast cancer: the CTNeoBC pooled analysis , 2014, The Lancet.

[34]  S. Mclaughlin,et al.  Sentinel lymph node surgery after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with node-positive breast cancer: the ACOSOG Z1071 (Alliance) clinical trial. , 2013, JAMA.

[35]  W. Han,et al.  Breast Cancer Molecular Phenotype and the Use of HER2-Targeted Agents Influence the Accuracy of Breast MRI After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy , 2013, Annals of surgery.

[36]  T. Julian,et al.  Accuracy of Clinical Examination, Digital Mammogram, Ultrasound, and MRI in Determining Postneoadjuvant Pathologic Tumor Response in Operable Breast Cancer Patients , 2011, Annals of Surgical Oncology.

[37]  A. Purushotham,et al.  Neoadjuvant chemotherapy: not the best option in estrogen receptor-positive, HER2-negative, invasive classical lobular carcinoma of the breast? , 2010, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[38]  L. Schwartz,et al.  New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). , 2009, European journal of cancer.

[39]  H. Tsuda,et al.  Histopathological criteria for assessment of therapeutic response in breast cancer (2007 version) , 2008, Breast cancer.

[40]  Ashraf M Shoma,et al.  Ultrasound for Accurate Measurement of Invasive Breast Cancer Tumor Size , 2006, The breast journal.

[41]  P. Bossuyt,et al.  The diagnostic odds ratio: a single indicator of test performance. , 2003, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[42]  H. Tsuda,et al.  Histopathological criteria for assessment of therapeutic response in breast cancer , 2001, Breast cancer.